Re: Oracle alternatives

We have over 400 "commodity" Intel boxes running Linux and MySQL. We
use master-to-master replication for failover, and each master box is
replicated to a slave. We're currently in the process of setting up
cross-datacenter replication too. It's easy and fast.

We don't lose data and don't have a problem with data corruption and
downtime. Contrary to a much stated, but misguided and wrong,
statement on this list from a member or two there really is
roll-forward and point-in-time recovery available in MySQL. We use it
on a daily basis. And, it makes moving customers from one box to
another fast and painless, with no more than a couple of seconds
downtime for the customer.

I've been using Oracle for almost 20 years now. I've administered
Postgres databases for a few years (not currently) and was very
impressed with it. Great database. I've been using MySQL for about 5
years now and have watched it evolve from a fast, cheap, and oft-times
unreliable product into a viable solution.

The right tool for the job. I fly into backcountry airstrips in
Montana on a pretty regular basis, flying in a small airplane some
people think is dangerous and held together by duct tape, but is
actually very reliable and perfect for the job. Works slightly better
than an Airbus 320, although the Airbus does a pretty good job for
what it was designed for.

I'm not going to denigrate any database. They all work well. I'm not
going to call one "a toy", "trash", or "overpriced". If it works for
my needs I'll use it.

--Walt Weaver
Bozeman, Montana
MySQL Certified Professional

On 5/7/05, Radu-Adrian Popescu <radu.popescu_at_aldratech.com> wrote:

>=20

> > Dick,> > Oracle will always be my first love, but I have been dabbling with MySq=
l
> > on> > the side. Your article, plus a few of your other posts, have gotten me =
a
>=20
> DON'T ! (mysql, that is ;)